Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Sunday 31 January 2016

Hamas's Haniyeh: Truce is Battle Preparation Time (video)

Speaking on Friday at the funeral of seven Hamas operatives who died when a tunnel collapsed, Ismail Haniyeh hints at another conflict:

Friday 29 January 2016

EU Labels: A French Oleh Writes ...

Here's a post on European double standards by French oleh Jean Vercors.

He will be no stranger to regular readers of this blog.

His article is provocatively entitled "The European Union is happy : it's just following in the footsteps of the Nazi boycott to make the world better".

Writes Jean Vercors:

The European Union (apart from the Czech Republic, which has all my respect) approved without hesitation Wednesday the implementation of the labeling of products originating " Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories ".

What is immediately striking is that the EU is not at all embarrassed that its decision closely resembles the Nazi boycott of 1933. The old demons die har . In 1933, an economic boycott against the Jews was decided by the Nazi leadership, just weeks after coming to power on 30 January that year.

For the EU, these exports to label sources "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories", that is to say the geographical areas annexed by Israel after the 1967 war: the Golan Heights , Gaza Strip, West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The Jews, we must say, dared to defend itself in a war that Europe believed lost to Israel: remember the embargo of Charles de Gaulle and his statements after Israel crushed the enemy [in 1967]. They dared to reclaim their historic lands of Judea and Samaria, and Jerusalem! Who can forgive the Jews for refusing to submit? Certainly not Europe.

The European measure involves mainly agricultural products: fruits and vegetables, wine, honey, olive oil, eggs, dates, chicken ... because the vast majority of industrial exports "colonies" consists of components or spare parts then assembled in finished products, which makes them difficult to trace.

Cosmetics from the Dead Sea are also targeted, but the EU still does not know that the Ahava company was bought by the Chinese (Chinese investment firm Fosun ) and that the Chinese do not perhaps hear with the same ear.

Will EU technocrats, one day soon, draw signs on Jewish shops in Europe that sell these products, as did the Nazi SA (Sturmabteilung or Storm Troopers ) in 1933?

The Star of David was painted in yellow and black across thousands of doors and windows , accompanied by anti-Semitic slogans such as " Do not buy from Jews," "Jews are our misfortune ."

Acts of violence were perpetrated against Jews and Jewish property across Germany, the police intervening only rarely .

According to the directive given by the European Commission, the mention of the country of origin must take into account the heading under which the territories are most commonly known.

The indication " Israeli settlement " should be specified in brackets, for example.

Mention may be formulated as follows: "Product of the West Bank (Israeli settlement )"; if the product comes from "Palestine" but not a "colony,"  the statement could be: "Product of the West Bank ( Palestinian produce )."

The formulation is left to the discretion of member states, which are responsible for implementing and enforcing EU legislation on consumer protection . The economic impact of this measure could create unemployment and misery of the Palestinians, but the EU does not care: for it is a small price to pay to punish the Jews.

The New York Times, for example, recalled that at least 25,000 Palestinians work for Israeli companies operating in the "so-called occupied territories " and are paid three to four times more than wages in Palestinian businesses. Many will lose their jobs but the EU does not care.

According to Israel, "it is strange or annoying to see that the EU chooses to apply double standards towards Israel, while there are more than 200 territorial disputes in the rest of the world, the case of Western Sahara, which Morocco took control in 1975 and which is not subject to the same treatment by the EU being one of them. "

Also this recalls the Arab boycott (inspired by the Nazi model) in respect of Israel established even before the existence of the State of Israel, coordinated by the League of Arab States in December 1945.

Why labelling Israeli goods and not Moroccan products manufactured in Western Sahara annexed and colonised?

And Danish products made in Greenland? Will they be labelled?

And the products of Ceuta and Melilla occupied by Spain?

And what about the products from Martinique, Guyane, Réunion, Corsica, Brittany, Basque country occupied by France?

And the products manufactured in the Turkish part of Cyprus colonised and annexed?

And those manufactured by the Chinese occupied Tibet?

Or the products manufactured in the occupied Dutch Guiana, the products Falklands Islands (Malvinas) occupied by England?

The EU prefers to import rapugees ["rapefugees"] and terrorists rather than Israeli tomatoes?

Targeting only Israel and ignoring the others is quite unbearable, but the EU does so with one voice having a good conscience, feeling of doing what is right and human. Before the war as it was thought in Germany that getting rid of the Jewish problem, it was for good.

The great humanists and defenders of EU human rights does not even attempt to justify its double standards against Israel.

Israel is so strong, and Europe, alas, so advanced in its self-destruction, that the Jews with their long history are likely to see European civlisation disappear like so many civilisations before it.

Pretending hypocritically to fight injustice by labeling, by putting again to humanity the idea of Jews as pariahs, Europeans are only encourage hatred and violence (in the name of justice!).

The Czech Republic, Hungary and Greece (which, interestingly, is the most antisemitic country in Europe according to the latest study by the ADL) have rejected this discriminatory directive.

The Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó said
"This is an ineffective instrument, irrational and that do not contribute to a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but causes damages."
Czech MP Robin Böhnisch, denounced these measures.
"The argument of the European Commission that the guidelines are a service for European consumers is absurd. It is obviously intended to put Israel under pressure, and at a time that requires a meticulous political activism rather than awkward.
 The creation of the European Economic Community was founded on the idea that we cannot achieve peace and security as trade, economic cooperation and employment creation - not by boycotts and isolation. The same is true for Israelis and Palestinians ".
The EU claims to be fighting against racism and discrimination; since the Amsterdam Treaty ( 1999) yet it does nothing to protest, for example, the massacres of Christians.
The purpose of this labeling directive is intended to reduce the Jewish nation, to press home the shameful trope, via each label, that Israel is a colonial villain , a thief of lands*.

(Permitted for Publication with the following: © Jean Vercors

*On the latter point (adds Daphne) readers may be interested to see what Ari Briggs, of Regavim, tells J-Wire here 

Meanwhile, across the Herring Pond ...

Thursday 28 January 2016

Al Beeb Displays Its Double Standards (Again)

The London Jewish News (the Jewish Chronicle's giveaway rival) reports, inter alia:

'The BBC has said it was “inadvisable” for former director of television Danny Cohen to oppose cultural boycotts of Israel.

In an astonishing statement, BBC chief complaints adviser Dominic Groves sent in January said: “The BBC agrees that it was inadvisable for him to add his signature given his then seniority within the BBC as director of television.”
 Groves admitted that “in practice, it had no bearing on his ability to do his day-to-day job, a role which does not involve direct control over BBC news.”'

The paper goes on to quote Board of Deputies' president Jonathan Arkush thus:
“Sadly, we don’t expect much from the BBC given its lack of balance on issues concerning Israel.  It was therefore thoroughly hypocritical to criticise its former director of television for allegedly not being impartial.  Moreover, to talk of BDS as an issue of current political controversy is wrong. The bigotry against Israel, not repeated in relation to any other country in the world, is not a political but a moral issue, on which people should be free to speak their mind. Fortunately the boycotters are rejected by mainstream political parties and most sections of our society, so Danny Cohen was on the right side of the argument."
(See the full report here)
 (Guardian report here)

When is Britain's ultra-arrogant thumb-nosing leftist-infested publicly-funded national broadcaster going to tell Bowen, Danahar, Donnison and the rest of its claque of reporters and correspondents who show their partiality towards the anti-Israel narrative again and again and again without censure that their partiality is "inappropriate"?

Well, we know what worldview the successful traineeship applicants will be expected to hold, among other politically correct attributes.  But I wonder whether it still helps to have a daddy in the Corporation (I mean, as Jezza will be well aware, there have been an awful lot of father-son and occasionally father-daughter teams in the BBC, which presumably would frown on nepotism and the hereditary principle elsewhere!)

Update: Courtesy of BBCWatch, yet another brazen example of the BBC's odious bias against Israel:

Brian Gives the Lowdown on Facebook Antisemitism (video)

The Iran Deal in a Nutshell

Writes US Iran-watcher and security consultant Fred Fleitz:
'.... Legendary national-security expert Richard Perle said it best in a recent interview with Secure Freedom Radio:
Their concept is that the terms of the agreement and the likely consequences if the Iranians choose to do what they are able to do under the agreement don’t matter because this agreement is somehow going to magically transform an Iranian regime that regards the United States as the great Satan and engages us through the subvention of terrorism in many places throughout the world. . . . And so for people who hold this view — and I believe the president is among them — the details of the agreement and the consequences of the agreement are of no significance. They are making an enormous and I think an improvident bet. This bet is that this agreement, which satisfies what the Iranians are looking for, will somehow lead the Iranians to become our friends. In this they are certainly mistaken.
That’s the utter absurdity of the Iran deal in a nutshell: Its details don’t matter, because it is meant only to transform Iran into an American ally, against all reason.... [G]iving Iran everything it wanted in a nuclear agreement won’t lead it to rejoin the community of civilized nations and become a friend of the U.S. All indications from Tehran say the opposite: the regime’s character remains unchanged, and if anything it has become a more influential and destabilizing actor in the Middle East since it signed the nuclear deal.
Read Fred Fleitz's entire article  here


Wednesday 27 January 2016

Mr Gatoff Presents ... Thoughts on Antisemitism & the Holocaust

Here's Aussie Newton Gatoff, with a suitable video this Holocaust Memorial Day.  It begins with the plight of the Jews of France and goes on to show some incorrigible antisemites of the Holocaust-denying kind, including British weirdo Nick (BNP) Griffin ...

(The Shtick is a Jewish television magazine program presented by Melbourne's Henry Greener, who, like Leonard Cohen, is never without a natty hat.)

Tuesday 26 January 2016

In Europe, A Spreading Virus (video)

It's reported that: 
"... Professor Nir Barzilai, director and founder of the Institute for Aging Research at Yeshiva University's Albert Einstein College of Medicine ... is overseeing a clinical trial titled "Targeting Aging with Metformin", or TAME, which seeks to discover whether Metformin, a medication prescribed for diabetes, may also delay the onset of aging-related illnesses, such as cancer, heart disease, and cognitive impairment.
The trial is currently in the final stages of planning and is searching for further sources of funding. The planned trial is to involve administering Metformin to thousands of elderly people, some of whom suffer from the aforementioned illnesses, and some of whom have the potential to develop the illnesses. Another group of subjects, identical in makeup to the first, is to be given a placebo as a control...."

Comments (hat tip: reader P) a British woman whose name does not suggest an Islamic identity, though I have no idea of her personal circumstances:

It's in part a reflection of the influences under which European Israel-haters now find themselves that the antisemitism that underlies so much of the anti-Israel movement doesn't always bother, as it once did, to try to disguise itself.

Regarding the spread of the virus of Islamic antisemitism in today's Europe, here's a lecture (the video's 86 minutes long, mind!) by the Syrian-born German-based scholar Professor Bassam Tibi

(The meeting's chairman really should heed the old adage that "brevity if the source of wit": his introduction of the speaker is almost a speech in itself!)

And here's Merkel ...

Monday 25 January 2016

The European Union Becomes Irrelevant In Resolving The Jewish-Arab Conflict, argues David Singer

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

The Council of the European Union (EU) has disqualified itself from influencing any resolution of the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict following the release of its "Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process" on 18 January.

Continuing its partisan support of Arab demands the EU has reaffirmed its July 2014 position:
"The EU recalls its willingness to engage further with regional partners on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative which provides key elements for the settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict as well as the opportunity for building a regional security framework."
Key elements of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative included:
1. "Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights to the lines of June 4, 1967 as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon."
2. "The acceptance of the establishment of a Sovereign Independent Palestinian State on the Palestinian territories occupied since the 4th of June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza strip, with east Jerusalem as its capital"
Israel's agreement to negotiate with the PLO on the basis of the 2003 Bush Roadmap was contingent on the removal of all references to the Arab Peace Initiative from the Roadmap along with 13 other detailed reservations.

American Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice gave the following assurances to Israel on 23 May 2003:
“The roadmap was presented to the Government of Israel with a request from the President that it respond with contributions to this document to advance true peace. The United States Government received a response from the Government of Israel, explaining its significant concerns about the roadmap. The United States shares the view of the Government of Israel that these are real concerns and will address them fully and seriously in the implementation of the roadmap to fulfil the President’s vision of June 24, 2002.”
This fundamental disconnect between the EU and Israel over the Arab Peace Initiative continues to detrimentally impact on their relationship.

Full Israeli withdrawal from these territories or even equivalent land swaps as suggested by the EU in its July 2014 manifesto is a pipe dream, given that the creation of Islamic State since then has seen it:
1. conquer an area of Syria and Iraq larger than Great Britain resulting in millions of Arabs being brutally slain, injured, traumatised and physically displaced into Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and even the EU.
2. become a distinct security threat to Israel and its Arab neighbours.
The Arab Peace Initiative has been effectively consigned to the dustbin of history as a result.
Stubbornly continuing to support these key elements of the Arab Peace Initiative has led a clearly frustrated EU to take action to unilaterally end Israel's total lawful control of Area "C" in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) by instigating the following intemperate actions:
1. Requiring Israel to specifically identify goods, products and services originating from Jewish settlements in Judea,Samaria,the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem
2. Funding and actively supporting illegal Arab housing construction in Area "C"
Israel reportedly considers that such actions by the EU give the Palestinian Arabs false hope that if they just hold out long enough  the EU will somehow be able to “deliver” Israel.

EU policy and its conduct since July 2014 has exacerbated the Jewish-Arab conflict rather than playing a constructive role in its resolution.

In reaffirming that policy in 2016 despite total chaos occurring among Arab States in the region
the EU has clearly become irrelevant and can no longer have any meaningful role in resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict.

Sunday 24 January 2016

The Ugly Face of Wallström's Sweden

Here are a trio of recent videos that illustrate the ugly face of the once beautiful, now ruined, land of Sweden, whose female Foreign Minister, the frightful Margot Wallström, demonises Israel every chance she gets.

That's the same Margot Wallström mentioned here (she held that position from 2010-14):

First, a video that needs no translation, featuring a man from a "very conservative culture" (to use BBC-speak for misogynistic Middle Eastern/North African societies).  Watch this wretch try to rob an elderly woman, and then spit at and whack a younger woman who's wise to what he's up to.

Second, a fine brave candid look at rape statistics in Sweden (and the "politically correct psychosis" regarding them):

Third, a distressing example of the despicable absurdity of Sweden's penal system:

O, Leftist Feminism, what hypocrisy you foster!

O, Eurabian Multiculturalism! What crimes against women are committed in your name!

Grabbing the Guidelines that Make the Headlines

In that invariably clever way of his, British blogger Edgar Davidson has given insights into the guidelines that make the headlines in the leftist media (that includes the BBC).

Here are a couple of screengrabs: the remainder can be viewed here and here

Reminds me of the Online Hate Prevention Institute's ludicrous "Diktat" that I quoted here

We see the above guidelines at work with Emma Jane Kirby's piece on the BBC website referring to behavioural classes in Finland for immigrants that, afraid to call a spade a spade but evidently itching to, obediently refers to misogynistic Islamic cultures as "very conservative cultures".

And, of course, the T word is never to be mentioned when Israel is its victim.

Therefore, when I read the following by the BBC's Imogen Foulkes today, I was somewhat surprised that she had used the T word without some kind of qualification such as "regarded by some" or "regarded by Israel as" (but perhaps I'm getting too carried away):
'Controversy is growing in Switzerland over an alleged secret deal, made almost 50 years ago, between the Swiss government and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).
The agreement, detailed in a new book, was apparently designed to prevent terrorist attacks on Swiss territory.
In return, Switzerland would offer diplomatic support to the PLO.
It followed a series of attacks in 1969 and 1970 by Palestinian groups that caused huge concern in Switzerland....
Now, in a book by Swiss journalist Marcel Gyr, information has emerged indicating that, in the stressful days and nights while Switzerland tried to get its hostages released, Swiss Foreign Minister Pierre Graber secretly contacted the PLO.
Using a member of the Swiss parliament as an intermediary, but without informing his fellow government ministers, Mr Graber, the new revelations suggest, came to an agreement under which those charged for the attack on the El Al plane would be released in return for freeing the hostages.
In addition the investigation into the bombing of the Swissair flight would be quietly shelved, and Switzerland would use its diplomatic offices to push for international recognition of the PLO....
Many of the documents relating to the events of 1970 are still classified under Swiss law but the revelations have started a big debate in Switzerland over the circumstances, if any, under which governments should consider negotiating with terrorist groups.
Almost half a century later, with many countries experiencing terror attacks, it seems outrageous to some Swiss that their own government might have done deals with groups classed as terrorists.
What is more, the relatives of those who died in the bombing of the Swissair flight may be justified in feeling angry that no one has ever been brought to justice, especially as Swiss investigators had identified a Jordanian national as the mastermind behind the attack....'
Read all of Imogen Foulkes's report here

Friday 22 January 2016

Palestinian Propaganda's "Willing & Blind Accomplices"

Introducing Al Beeb's Mario Cacciottolo, who's not only a chocoholic, and an Asterix and Beano man.

The BBC's so obviously leftist Jon Donnison, flouting objectivity once again with this tweet against Trump and Palin

and notorious for his own stupidity regarding a certain photograph of a dead Arab child

might be better employed reflecting on the stupidity of his colleague Mario, who's frankly described as a "cretin" in this expose by the excellent David Collier:

Yes, like Donnison himself, Mario has proved himself all too eager to act as a megaphone for Palestinian propaganda.

Here are snippets from a great post on an always interesting and perceptive blog that monitors the BBC (here):

As Hadar Sela, now of BBC Watch, wrote at the time of Donnison's Israel-defaming use of that photograph, that casual apology of Donnison's " is nowhere near sufficient".

And to quote Collier concerning this latest gaffe-outrage:
"The damage has been done. A terrorist supporting propagandist, has elicited more sympathy for the Palestinian cause simply because the BBC have become willing and blind accomplices. They fell for a PR trick and spread the work of a PR man for the Palestinian cause, undiluted. The ‘reporters’ who regurgitate the spin do not perform even the most cursory of background checks. Our taxes [i.e. the licence fee] funded unfiltered Hamas propaganda without the BBC even blinking."

Thursday 21 January 2016

Joel's Palestine Visa

An average person, looking at this image posted on Facebook by Palestine News Network, would surely express sympathy for the poor desperate soul in Kovno granted the visa and hope he managed to avail himself of it and escape death in the Shoah.

 Not so the anti-Israel activists, composed of the usual array of suspects, who have rushed to embrace it for their own malodorous ends.

No curiosity about the person granted it or his fate.  Only the usual demonisation of Zionism and Israel, only the usual distortions. of the Mandatory period.

I suppose the only surprising thing is that any of us continue to be surprised.

As a click  here shows, Joel Blumencwajg was born in a shtetl in Volhynia in November 1924.

He reached Palestine in 1941.

Blaming Eau de Cologne

Well, what a surprise.  A Salafist imam in Cologne has demonstrated his creed's odious attitude to women by blaming the plight of the Cologne rape victims on themselves:

'Speaking to major Russian channel REN TV, Imam Sami Abu-Yusuf’s remarks came during a 12 minute segment bringing Russians up to date with the latest developments in the migrant invasion of Europe.

 Sandwiched between eyewitness-footage of migrant rampages in Cologne, women being sexually assaulted by apparently Arab gangs, and a segment on a surge of interest in self defence courses in Germany the Imam told the interviewer: “we need to react properly, and not to add fuel to the fire”.
Explaining in the view of Salafist Islam why hundreds of women found themselves groped, sexually assaulted and in some cases raped by gangs of migrant men in cities across Germany the Imam said: “the events of New Year’s Eve were the girls own fault, because they were half naked and wearing perfume. It is not surprising the men wanted to attack them. [Dressing like that] is like adding fuel to the fire”.
The tone of the report was telling, expressing no surprise that Muslim mass migration would result in violence and gang-rape. The narrator of the report told viewers that after the events of New Year’s Eve it was becoming difficult to tell who’s country Germany was, one belonging to Muslims or to Germans. Also expressed was the opinion that the sex attacks were no more than a dress rehearsal for something much bigger to come...'
 Read more on this stinker here

Meanwhile,  there's at least one leftist German women's rights activist who, enraging some of the perverse elements in the sisterhood, has dared to lay the blame for the multiple sexual assaults on women in her own home town and elsewhere on New Year's Eve where it resides.

It's reported that Alice Schwarzer 'became a lightning rod for feminist [shouldn't that read "feminist"] and anti-racist anger after New Year’s Eve when she condemned the attacks on women as a “gang bang” designed to terrorize women.'

But she's unrepentant, as indeed she should be:
“Many feminists have remained silent from the outset regarding the problem of Islamist agitation, out of fear they will be accused of racism. It’s the old hierarchy of victims, that we already knew in [the student protests of] 1968. Then it was called class struggle before the battle of the sexes. Today it is called anti-racism against feminism.
It is unfortunately a fact that many of the so called ‘post-feminist’ Internet feminists who are for pornography and prostitution are in favor of the head scarf and even the burqa. They say this is all about the free choice of women...
[T]he crime scene on New Year’s Eve seems very strange, because in Germany we have never seen this before: mass sexual violence in public with a powerless police looking on. This is a whole new dimension.
I think this explosion of sexual violence on the same night in five countries and in a dozen cities is no coincidence. This is organized." 
She went on:
I’m not talking about Muslims, or Islam as a faith. I’m talking about the politicization of Islam, the right-wing Islamism, whose banner is the veiling of women. This started in Iran in 1979 with Khomeini, and (elsewhere) it has been financed by Saudi Arabia. The Islamists firmly established themselves in Afghanistan and Chechnya (with introduction of Sharia law in 1994), Algeria (200,000 dead in the 1990s) and are now are arriving triumphant in the heart of Europe.
The Islamists have not only stirred up misogyny among young Muslim men towards women over recent years and decades, but I am also convinced the sexual violence of New Year’s Eve was provoked [by them]. There were a few hundred willing followers.”
Read more about the feminist/"feminist" response to Cologne in an interesting piece here

And in the Netherlands, disquiet in the wake of Cologne:

Monday 18 January 2016

"They Hate Israel Because They Hate Themselves"

'It isn't the Israelis who are paranoid it's anti-Israel Europeans.  They're the ones who madly look upon one nation, one people, as toxic, destabilising, destructive, out to get us all and do over world peace.  Such swirling paranoia often means that anti-Zionism crosses the lines into antisemitism.

Some Israelis I spoke to [recently] seemed more upset about the turn against Europe in Israel than they were about the more immediate threat posed by Islamists in the Middle East.

It wasn't hard to work out why.  As one said, "We considered Europe a friend"; "We thought Europe and Israel had a lot in common, being Western and democratic."

This cuts to the heart of the Euro-elites' paranoia about Israel, their turn against it; it is really European values, the ideals of modernity and democracy that they've given up on.

The thing that riles them most about Israel is that it reminds them of what they used to be like, of the values they once espoused, before they lost the moral plot and sank into the cesspit of relativism and post-Enlightenment self-loathing.

Plucky, keen to protect its sovereignty, considering itself an outpost of liberalism ... Israel is a painful reminder to today's anchorless European thinkers and agitators of what their nations once were.

They hate Israel because they hate themselves.

Israel has become the whipping boy of guilt-ridden Western liberals who've given up on the very idea of the West." [Emphasis added]

So wrote the Brendan O'Neill, editor of Spiked Online, in an admirably perceptive article in the London Jewish News late last year that was picked up by the Australian Jewish News.

This video, in which the Canadian writer/commentator Mark Steyn (how wonderful it used to be to read his regular columns in the UK Daily Telegraph back in the days when Conrad Black owned that newspaper) declares Multiculturalism as "the slipperiest of all isms," illuminates the loss of direction and purpose that's befallen and bedevils the West. 

Bedevils the West and betrays its sons and (especially) its daughters, as well as generations yet unborn.

 Some of the serfs, however, are getting restless.

Update, a well-deserved little dig at the feministas, although the use of the word "spastic" in this context is to be deplored: (hat tip Ian):

Sunday 17 January 2016

Beware the Diktats

As the BBC, to its credit, reports at length here, there's a Twitter campaign afoot to show solidarity in France with beleaguered French Jewry by wearing kippot in sympathy with that community, whose members are feeling so vulnerable that (as again the BBC reports) they are making aliya in unprecedented numbers.

The reason for their plight and flight is, of course, heightened levels of antisemitism, including vicious physical attacks and killings, perpetrated mainly by Islamic haters of Jews and Israel.

"Eurabia" and its consequences for Jews, for Israel, for women, for western civilisation itself, is of course a legitimate, indeed a vital subject for discourse.  The ramifications of mass Muslim migration, particularly of unaccompanied males, affects us all.  Many Europe-watchers predict dire consequences for Europeans' progeny.  Some foresee a civil war.  Others believe that it is not too fanciful to suggest that, if demographic trends remain as they are, national legislatures, including the parliament at Westminster,might one day consist of a majority of persons who would vote in sharia law!

Meanwhile,  however, the increasingly dictatorial Online Hate Prevention Institute (OHPI) has chided a social media user concerned at the recent sex assaults on women in Germany and elsewhere who used the phrase "gangs of young Arab men of military age" in relation to the attacks.

Warns the OHPI:

I have blogged  about the deleterious implications for free speech now posed by the OHPI. 

So, much more ably, have others.

See, for example, here

And here

There is even a rather disturbing video in existence.  You can see it here

Whatever its merits (and it certainly has some), the OHPI must not be permitted to muzzle or intimidate political discourse by a campaign of removal or threats to remove, or to dilute (I could almost say "emasculate"!) the narrative of that discourse by dictating how legitimate concerns are to be phrased.